The Panasonic Lumix DMC-G10 is one of two Micro Four Thirds DSLRs (G10, G2) released in March 2010. The DMC-G10 is touted as the world’s lightest interchangeable lens camera with a viewfinder. It utilizes a mirrorless structure that doesn’t require either a mirror box or an optical viewfinder, thereby drastically reducing the unit’s weight. It does, however, come with an included LUMIX G VARIO 14-42mm/F3.5-5.6 ASPH/MEGA O.I.S. lens that’s suitable for shooting a wide-range of scenes, from dynamic landscape to portrait. Like the G2, it hosts a 12.1MP sensor and the Venus Engine HD II, but it lacks its sibling’s tilt/swivel and touch options. Additional features include 720p video capture, iA mode, AF Tracking, and Face Recognition.

Videos

Pictures

Related Products

Add New Related Product

In love with these micro four thirds and four thirds options. Was interested in getting the larger #panasonic_lumix_dmc_g10 before setting eventually on an even larger full dSLR, the #Nikon_D90 Just can't justify the comparable cost for a smaller body at the expense of image quality. Highly suggest it for individuals for whom size and weight plays a much more important role in buying a camera, though! Know there are many more of those types of people out there these days. Just too bad it won't make it to market for Christmas.

slight correction: I thought the G1/G2/G10 etc were four thirds whereas the GF1 and GF2 were micro four thirds - simply based on the fact that the cameras are considerably smaller. I knew the G10 etc didn't have mirrors, but it turns out the four thirds design is used with mirrors, like any SLR, and is all but extinct.

As for comparing image quality - that's probably very difficult even for an expert on optical electronics / optics to make. Personally I would say 80-90% is a fair assessment. The photographer's knowledge and ability to photograph properly, the specific subject / environment they shoot most often (eg/ portrait, landscape, low light, etc...), and how well their lens is suited to said type of photography, play much larger roles in the quality of the image, bigger than any technical differences by far.

Here are some direct technical comparisons which should have some meaning, if all else is equal:

DxOMark (which some believe is an arbitrary measurement) gives the GF1 a score of 53 overall - with the ability to capture 21.2bits of colour data with a dynamic range of 10.3EVs. The D3100 has an overall score of 67, 22.5 bits and 11.3EVs. It also almost doubles the GF1's score for low light sensitivity - most likely due to the larger sensors ability to soak up more light.

For interest and comparison to more expensive cameras: the brand new D7000 gets a score of 80 (second highest to date for a APS-C sensor), 23.5bits, 13.9EVs, and the slightly older, professional full frame D3s - used primarily for low light / fast sports photography - gets an 82, 23.5bits, 12EVs, but a low light sensitivity almost 3x that of both the D7000 and D3100 - again not only due to the fact that it generates the image with a full frame sensor much larger than both of those cameras - but a lower resolution one (12MP vs ~14-16MP).

While there are no full reviews of the D3100 out right now, I'd probably point an interested amateur photographer in that direction first.